lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jul]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 3/3] m68k: switch to MEMBLOCK + NO_BOOTMEM
On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 02:51:21PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 04-07-18 15:43:35, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 02:36:27PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
> > > index 03d48d8835ba..2acec4033389 100644
> > > --- a/mm/memblock.c
> > > +++ b/mm/memblock.c
> > > @@ -227,7 +227,8 @@ phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_find_in_range_node(phys_addr_t size,
> > > * so we use WARN_ONCE() here to see the stack trace if
> > > * fail happens.
> > > */
> > > - WARN_ONCE(1, "memblock: bottom-up allocation failed, memory hotunplug may be affected\n");
> > > + WARN_ONCE(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTREMOVE),
> > > + "memblock: bottom-up allocation failed, memory hotremove may be affected\n");
> >
> > nit: isn't the warning indented too much?
>
> this is what vim did for me. The string doesn't fit into 80 even if I
> indented it to the first bracket. If you feel strongly I can do that
> though.

Not really. With wrapping if looks better like this :)

> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
>

--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-07-04 14:58    [W:0.120 / U:0.376 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site